anonymous
Thu Feb 12 16:57:30 CST 2004
>-----Original Message-----
>In microsoft.public.money,
<anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>cal, thank you for your kindly reply. Regarding the
>>Candian Money version's implementation, I take an
example
>>like this: if I buy a stock ABC in $5000 in my
retirement
>>account, and later my wife buy the same stock ABC in
$1000
>>in her retirement account later (may in different
price),
>>Money will show the cost basis of my wife account for
>>stock ABC is around $2000 or more, not its real value of
>>$1000.
>
>In doing my reading, I run across "registered account" as
the phrase
>that distinguishes what should be combined for basis
purposes and
>what should not.
>
>> From both tax or analysis reason, I can't get it
>>how it works. Even for tax reason, I think in Canada the
>>tax analsis for investment is based on person, not
family,
>>how it can works in this way?
>
>Really? In the US, most married people file jointly, and
there the
>finances are commingled for tax purposes. Are you fairly
confident
>that the holdings of your wife in a regular taxable
account do not
>affect your basis calculation for funds you hold in a
taxable
>account? I understand that in your case the funds are in
retirement
>accounts, which we believe makes the basis not affect the
basis in
>any other account -- even if held by the same person.
>
>The tax basis of a fund/stock is called Adjusted cost
base (ACB),
>and it appears to be fairly complex. Page 21 of T4027
>
http://www.ccra-adrc.gc.ca/E/pub/tg/t4037/t4037-e.pdf
talks about
>it, but that particular area does not touch on possible
affects of
>holding by a spouse.
>
>> I wonder if Microsoft really
>>understand the situation in Canada, and really take the
>>busniess in Canada seriously
>
>
>I think what you would like to see is to make the basis
calculations
>in a retirement account independent of that in all other
accounts.
>
>The thing that would give another way to work around this
is to let
>you define different securities that share the same
symbol.
>
>Is unclear to me if the basis of the holdings in a
Canadian
>retirement account has tax implications, or if rather the
retirement
>account itself has a basis for all holdings.
>
>It is true that Money gives less attention to the
Canadian Money
>customers. The tax on both sides are complicated, but the
number of
>customers using each set of rules will be a significant
factor.
>
I am prety sure that in Canada the tax is based on a
personal income, not family. The overall family income has
only impact to the tax creadit, which is not in the range
we talk about here. This is why there is so-called Spousal
RRSP account in Canada in which a persone with higher
income can make contribution to his/her spousal's
requirement account, becaues it will be taxed only to the
people wisthdraw from the account. It make sense to
indicate that each Canadian is taxed based on his own
income only, not family. And it is why it become important
for people to track their own account. Whatever the
reason, Microsoft Money "transfer" a higher investment
cost basis to an another account, and show it out as a
number which was never put in, that is ridicularse.